Change Texas Deadly Force Laws

I am a former Repo Man, one of the many Repossession Agents in Texas and across the country, who has been shot while on the job. As in most of the other cases, the shooter was released instead of being arrested. While I am sure that the police have their reasons for NOT taking the man who shot me to jail, it leaves me to question the nature of the laws regarding that type of situation.

Since September 29th of 2011, I have been walking around with a 12 gauge slug in the back of my head. I am suffering from PTSD and other medical problems associated with my injury, unable to pay to have this bullet removed, and unable to work or find a job. While Mr. Kenneth Walker sits at home and relaxes as if nothing ever happened, I am losing everything that I own!

In spite of everything, I know that I may not be able to change my situation. But, I would like to change things for the Repo Agents in the future. All I ask is that you change the laws, or make new ones, that protect a Repossession Agent if he/she is shot or fired upon during the legal repossession of a vehicle. Make it illegal to hide the vehicle (in my case it was chained to a fence) or deter repossession in any way.

Everyone thinks that it's "OK to shoot" if someone is on your property, but they misunderstand the law. That's only if you, your family, or your home is in immediate danger. It DOES NOT apply when there is a tow truck hooking up to your car!

I don't pretend to know much about the law, but I am pleading with you to please help me do something about the flimsy way that the laws regarding this type of situation are written.

 

§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY.  (a) A person in

lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is

justified in using force against another when and to the degree the

actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to

prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful

interference with the property.

        (b)  A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,

movable property by another is justified in using force against the

other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force

is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the

property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit

after the dispossession and:

               (1)  the actor reasonably believes the other had no

claim of right when he dispossessed the actor;  or

               (2)  the other accomplished the dispossession by using

force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

 

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. 

Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,

1994.

 

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.  A person is

justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or

tangible, movable property:

               (1)  if he would be justified in using force against the

other under Section 9.41;  and

               (2)  when and to the degree he reasonably believes the

deadly force is immediately necessary:

                       (A)  to prevent the other's imminent commission of

arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the

nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;  or

                       (B)  to prevent the other who is fleeing

immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated

robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the

property;  and

               (3)  he reasonably believes that:                                            

                       (A)  the land or property cannot be protected or

recovered by any other means;  or

                       (B)  the use of force other than deadly force to

protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or

another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

 

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. 

Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,

1994.